NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
721 reportsMileage unknown · Jun 19, 2006
Power Train
CONSUMER 2005 CAMRY HAS A PROBLEMS WITH THE TRANSMISSION. *TS THE CONSUMER STATED FROM A STOPPED POSITION, ABOUT 20% OF THE TIME , THE FIRST TWO TRANSMISSION SHIFTS WILL EXTEND BEYOND A NORMAL TIME PERIOD WHILE THE CAR'S ENGINE REVS TO ABOUT 3000 RPMS. AT TIMES, WHEN SLOWING TO ABOUT 10 TO 20 MPH AND THEN ACCELERATING, ABOUT …
Read full complaint
CONSUMER 2005 CAMRY HAS A PROBLEMS WITH THE TRANSMISSION. *TS THE CONSUMER STATED FROM A STOPPED POSITION, ABOUT 20% OF THE TIME , THE FIRST TWO TRANSMISSION SHIFTS WILL EXTEND BEYOND A NORMAL TIME PERIOD WHILE THE CAR'S ENGINE REVS TO ABOUT 3000 RPMS. AT TIMES, WHEN SLOWING TO ABOUT 10 TO 20 MPH AND THEN ACCELERATING, ABOUT 80% OF THE TIME THE TRANSMISSION WOULD HESITATE FOR 2 TO 3 SECONDS WHILE IT SELECTS A GEAR AND WILL THEN ENGAGE, SOMETIMES IN A HARSH MANNER DEPENDING UPON THE PRESSURE ON THE GAS PEDAL. THERE WAS NO SPECIFIC TIME WHEN THE ERRATIC SHIFTS WOULD OCCUR. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10160543
3,718 miles · Jun 8, 2006
Vehicle Speed Control
WHILE STOPPED AT AN INTERSECTION, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY AND UNEXPECTEDLY BEGAN TO REV UNCONTROLLABLY WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM ME. DUE TO THE HIGH REVOLUTIONS OF THE ENGINE THE BRAKES WERE INCAPABLE OF PRVENTING THE CAR FROM MOVING FORWARD EVEN THOUGH THE BRAKE PETAL WAS FULLY DEPRESSED. THE ONLY WAY TO PREVENT MY CAR FROM HITTING TH…
Read full complaint
WHILE STOPPED AT AN INTERSECTION, THE ENGINE SUDDENLY AND UNEXPECTEDLY BEGAN TO REV UNCONTROLLABLY WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM ME. DUE TO THE HIGH REVOLUTIONS OF THE ENGINE THE BRAKES WERE INCAPABLE OF PRVENTING THE CAR FROM MOVING FORWARD EVEN THOUGH THE BRAKE PETAL WAS FULLY DEPRESSED. THE ONLY WAY TO PREVENT MY CAR FROM HITTING THE CAR IN FRONT OF ME WAS TO SHUT OFF THE ENGINE. TWO SUBSEQUENT ATTEMPTS TO RE-START THE ENGINE RESULTED IN A REPEAT OF THE OVER-REVVING SITUATION. ONLY AFTER THE THIRD ATTEMPT DID THE ENGINE RESUME NORMAL OPERATION. A PASSENGER IN THE CAR AT THE TIME VERIFIED THAT THE ACCELERATOR WAS NOT ENGAGED AT ANY TIME DURING THE INCIDENT. THE CAR WAS IMMEDIATELY DRIVEN TO THE DEALER WHO INSPECTED IT AND FOUND NO FAULT WITH THE ETC SYSTEM AND NO STORED CODES THAT WOULD VERIFY MY COMPLAINT. THE CAR WAS SUBSEQUENTLY RETURNED TO US AND WAS DRIVEN WITHOUT INCIDENT FOR THE NEXT NINETEEN MONTHS BEFORE THE PROBLEM ONCE AGAIN PRESENTED ITSELF. AS WE WERE PULLING INTO A PARKING SPACE WHILE MY FOOT WAS ON THE BRAKE PETAL THE ENGINE ONCE AGAIN BEGAN TO OVER-REV WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM ME. AGAIN, THE PASSENGER IN THE CAR WHO HAD WITNESSED THE FIRST INCIDENT IMMEDIATELY LOOKED TO SEE IF THE ACCELERATOR WAS ACCIDENTALLY BEING DEPRESSED. IT WAS NOT. AGAIN, THE ONLY MEANS OF PREVENTING MY CAR FROM STRIKING THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF ME WAS TO SHUT OFF THE ENGINE. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10159364
8,500 miles · Jun 8, 2006
Seat BeltsCrashInjury
I WAS DRIVING AT 15 MPH WHEN THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF ME STOPPED SUDDENLY, AND I REAR-ENDED IT. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10159341
5,200 miles · May 17, 2006
Vehicle Speed ControlCrash
I WAS SLOWLY TURNING LEFT INTO A PARKING SPACE AT ABOUT 3:30 P.M., WHEN MY 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY SUDDENLY, AND QUITE RAPIDLY, ACCELERATED WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM ME. IT JUMPED A CURB, CROSSED A SIDEWALK, AND A TREE STOPPED THE CAR. IT FELT LIKE I HAD NO CONTROL OF THE CAR. ALSO, THE STEERING WAS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT. SOMEHOW, I MA…
Read full complaint
I WAS SLOWLY TURNING LEFT INTO A PARKING SPACE AT ABOUT 3:30 P.M., WHEN MY 2005 TOYOTA CAMRY SUDDENLY, AND QUITE RAPIDLY, ACCELERATED WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM ME. IT JUMPED A CURB, CROSSED A SIDEWALK, AND A TREE STOPPED THE CAR. IT FELT LIKE I HAD NO CONTROL OF THE CAR. ALSO, THE STEERING WAS EXTREMELY DIFFICULT. SOMEHOW, I MANAGED TO STEER THE CAR AWAY FROM THE APARTMENT BUILDING AND MY NEIGHBOR GLASS SLIDER. THE CAR TRAVELED ABOUT 30 PLUS FEET IN ITS ACCELERATION, WHEN A TREE STOPPED IT. IT LEFT ABOUT 20 FEET OF SKID MARKS. I WAS NOT HURT IN THE CRASH. THE CAR SUSTAINED DAMAGE, MAINLY TO THE FRONT BUMPER, COOLANT SYSTEM, AND HOOD, FOR APPROXIMATELY $5,400. I FILED A COMPLAINT WITH TOYOTA CORPORATION, TORRANCE, CALIFORNIA, AND THEY INVESTIGATED THE CAR. THEY REPORTED THEY COULD FIND NOTHING WRONG WITH THE CAR, AND THERE WERE NO DESIGN FAULTS. THE TOYOTA DEALER WHERE I HAD BOUGHT THE CAMRY ADDITIONALLY TESTED THE CAR COMPUTERS, AND ALSO CALLED IN A TOYOTA FACTORY REPRESENTATIVE TO TEST THE CAR. THEY COULD FIND NOTHING WRONG WITH THE CAR. I SOLD THE CAMRY BACK TO THIS DEALER. THE CAR HAD ABOUT 5,400 MILES ON IT AT THE TIME OF THE CRASH. THE CAR HAD BEEN RUNNING WELL UNTIL THIS SUDDEN, UNEXPLAINED ACCELERATION THAT RESULTED IN A CRASH. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10157743
3,000 miles · Apr 30, 2006
Engine And Engine CoolingFire
I WAS ON MY WAY TO WORK WHEN I NOTICED SMOKE COMING FROM THE HOOD OF MY CAR. LUCKILY, I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER ON THE SERVICE ROAD TO THE MAJOR HIGHWAY I WAS ABOUT TO GET ON. UPON GETTING OUT OF MY CAR AND OPENING THE HOOD I WAS FACED WITH FLAMES. CONCERNED ABOUT MY SAFETY AS WELL AS THE SAFETY OF PASSERS-BY, MY FIRST REACTION…
Read full complaint
I WAS ON MY WAY TO WORK WHEN I NOTICED SMOKE COMING FROM THE HOOD OF MY CAR. LUCKILY, I WAS ABLE TO PULL OVER ON THE SERVICE ROAD TO THE MAJOR HIGHWAY I WAS ABOUT TO GET ON. UPON GETTING OUT OF MY CAR AND OPENING THE HOOD I WAS FACED WITH FLAMES. CONCERNED ABOUT MY SAFETY AS WELL AS THE SAFETY OF PASSERS-BY, MY FIRST REACTION WAS TO TRY TO PUT OUT THIS FIRE. I RAN TO MY TRUNK, WHERE I ALWAYS KEEP A CASE OF BOTTLED WATER, AND TOOK APPROXIMATELY 8 WATER BOTTLES. I WAS ABLE TO EXTINGUISH THE FIRE. I AM CERTAIN THAT, HAD I NOT BEEN ABLE TO PULL SAFELY OFF THE ROAD OR DID NOT HAVE THE CLEAR MIND TO TRY TO EXTINGUISH THE FIRE, THE CAR WOULD'VE BEEN ENGULFED IN FLAMES AND TOTALED CAUSING SERIOUS INJURY TO ME AND POTENTIALLY THOSE CLOSE TO THE INCIDENT. THE CAR WAS TOWED TO THE NEAREST DEALERSHIP. I AM TOLD THAT THERE IS "SEVERE DAMAGE" BUT DO NOT HAVE ALL OF THE DETAILS YET. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10156471
28,000 miles · Mar 20, 2006
Engine And Engine Cooling
WHEN I WENT TO THE DEALERSHIP TO BUY THIS CAR THEY TOLD ME THAT THE TOTAL COST FOR THE CAR WOULD BE AROUND SIXTEEN THOUSAND. HOWEVER THE REAL TOTAL WAS AROUND THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLARS. WHEN I NOTICE IT WAS TOO LATE I HAD ALREADY SIGN. AT THAT MOMENT I TRIED TO FIX THAT PROBLEM WITH THE DEALERSHIP BUT THEY COMPLETELY IGNORE ME. …
Read full complaint
WHEN I WENT TO THE DEALERSHIP TO BUY THIS CAR THEY TOLD ME THAT THE TOTAL COST FOR THE CAR WOULD BE AROUND SIXTEEN THOUSAND. HOWEVER THE REAL TOTAL WAS AROUND THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLARS. WHEN I NOTICE IT WAS TOO LATE I HAD ALREADY SIGN. AT THAT MOMENT I TRIED TO FIX THAT PROBLEM WITH THE DEALERSHIP BUT THEY COMPLETELY IGNORE ME. AND JUST TO MAKE THINGS WORST THE CAR DOESN'T FUNCTION RIGHT; OUT OF NO WHERE IT JUST TURNS OFF. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO THE DEALERSHIP DOES NOT WANT TO COOPERATE. I WANT TO CANCEL THE PURCHASE OF THIS CAR. *NM
NHTSA ODI #10153246
12,000 miles · Mar 14, 2006
Air BagsCrashInjury
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 5 MPH THERE WAS A HEAD ON COLLISION WITH ANOTHER VEHICLE TRAVELING 20 MPH. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. SEAT BELTS WERE IN USE HOWEVER; SERIOUS HEAD AND NECK INJURIES WERE SUSTAINED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED AT THE SCENE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP. THE MANUF…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 5 MPH THERE WAS A HEAD ON COLLISION WITH ANOTHER VEHICLE TRAVELING 20 MPH. THE AIR BAGS FAILED TO DEPLOY. SEAT BELTS WERE IN USE HOWEVER; SERIOUS HEAD AND NECK INJURIES WERE SUSTAINED. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED AT THE SCENE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP. THE MANUFACTURER WAS ALERTED.
NHTSA ODI #10152702
11,362 miles · Mar 13, 2006
Service Brakes, Hydraulic
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THERE WAS A COMPLETE LACK OF BRAKE PRESSURE WHEN THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED AT 20 MPH. THE EMERGENCY BRAKE WAS USED TO SLOW THE VEHICLE ENOUGH TO REACH A RESIDENCE SAFELY. FROM THERE THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, WHO WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM, THEREFORE NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. BRAKES TRAVEL…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED THERE WAS A COMPLETE LACK OF BRAKE PRESSURE WHEN THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED AT 20 MPH. THE EMERGENCY BRAKE WAS USED TO SLOW THE VEHICLE ENOUGH TO REACH A RESIDENCE SAFELY. FROM THERE THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER, WHO WAS UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM, THEREFORE NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. BRAKES TRAVELED ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR IN ORDR TO ACTIVATE THE BRAKES. VEHICLE HAS BEEN TOWED TWICE TO THE DEALER FOR BRAKE FAILURE. VEHICLE WAS TEST AGAIN FOR BRAKE FAILURE ON MARCH 20, 2006 AND NO PROBLEM WAS FOUND. *AK
NHTSA ODI #10152569
12,500 miles · Mar 1, 2006
Power Train
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED AT SPEEDS BETWEEN 24 AND 30 MPH, THE VEHICLE, INTERMITTENTLY, LOST POWER THEN SLAMMED INTO GEAR. THE DEALERSHIP DID ACKNOWLEDGE THERE WAS A PROBLEM, BUT STATED INSTALLING A NEW TRANSMISSION WAS NO GUARANTEE THAT THE PROBLEM WOULD CEASE. UPDATED 03/28/06. *JB
NHTSA ODI #10151550
10,000 miles · Feb 28, 2006
SteeringSuspension
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH THE VEHICLE SHAKES, AND BOUNCES WHILE GOING OVER BUMPS. ADDITIONALY, THE BACK END OF THE VEHICLE MAKES A CLUNKING NOISE, AND A GRINDING SOUND IS COMING FROM THE STEERING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP FOR INSPECTION HOWEVER, THEY WERE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM AND N…
Read full complaint
DT*: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH THE VEHICLE SHAKES, AND BOUNCES WHILE GOING OVER BUMPS. ADDITIONALY, THE BACK END OF THE VEHICLE MAKES A CLUNKING NOISE, AND A GRINDING SOUND IS COMING FROM THE STEERING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALERSHIP FOR INSPECTION HOWEVER, THEY WERE UNABLE TO DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM AND NO REPAIRS WERE MADE. THE MANUFACTURER WAS ALERTED.
NHTSA ODI #10151406
Official recalls
5Jun 2, 2016
Southeast Toyota Distributors, LLC (SET) is recalling certain 2005-2011 4Runner, Highlander, Sequoia, and Sienna, 2005-2010 Avalon and Tundra, 2006-2008 Camry Solara, 2006-2010 Highlander hybrid, 2006-2011 Rav4 and Tacoma, 2007-2010 FJ Cruiser, 2007-2011 Camry hybrid, 2009-2010 Venza, 2010-2012 Prius, 1988-1990 and 2005-2010 Camry, and 1989 and 2009-2010 Corolla vehicles equipped with aftermarket accessory seat heaters with a copper strand heating element. The electrical wiring in the seat heaters may be damaged when the seat cushion is compressed.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If damaged, the copper strand heating element may short circuit, increasing the risk of a fire.
Remedy: SET will notify owners, and dealers will disconnect the seat heaters, free of charge, and refund the purchase price of the seat heater accessory. The recall began on July 14, 2016. Owners may contact SET customer service at 1-866-405-4226. SET number for this recall is SET16B.
Nov 9, 2011
TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2004 AVALON VEHICLES; 2004 AND 2005 CAMRY, CAMRY SOLARA, HIGHLANDER, AND SIENNA VEHICLES, 2006 HIGHLANDER HYBRID; 2004 AND 2005 LEXUS ES330 AND RX330; AND 2006 LEXUS RX400H VEHICLES MANUFACTURED FROM JUNE 1, 2004 THROUGH MARCH 31, 2005, EQUIPPED WITH THE 1MZ-FE OR 3MZ-FE ENGINE. THE AMOUNT OF ADHESIVE AGENT APPLIED BETWEEN THE OUTER RING AND THE TORSIONAL RUBBER DAMPER (INNER RING) IN THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY MAY BE INADEQUATE. IF THE ADHESIVE IS INSUFFICIENT, THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE OUTER RING MAY BECOME MISALIGNED AND IT MAY NOT PROPERLY ROTATE WITH THE INNER RING, CAUSING NOISE AND/OR ILLUMINATION OF THE BATTERY DISCHARGE INDICATOR LIGHT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IN SOME CASES, THE BELT FOR THE POWER STEERING PUMP MAY BECOME DETACHED FROM THE PULLEY WHICH COULD RESULT IN A LOSS OF POWER STEERING AND A SUDDEN INCREASE IN STEERING EFFORT, INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: TOYOTA WILL NOTIFY OWNERS, AND DEALERS WILL CHECK THE CRANKSHAFT PULLEY TO IDENTIFY WHETHER IT WAS PRODUCED BY THE U.S. SUPPLIER. IF SO, THE DEALER WILL REPLACE THE PULLEY WITH A NEW ONE AT NO CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL IS EXPECTED TO BEGIN DURING EARLY JANUARY 2012. OWNERS MAY CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331.
Feb 3, 2010
GULF STATES TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2010 VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 1, 2005 AND JUNE 2, 2008 WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS DOES NOT MEET THE STANDARD REQUIREMENTS.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. DEALERS WILL ALSO CORRECT THE OWNER'S MANUAL. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT GULF STATES TOYOTA AT 713-580-3300.
Feb 3, 2010
SOUTHEAST TOYOTA IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2005-2011 PASSENGER VEHICLES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 110, "TIRE SELECTION AND RIMS." THESE VEHICLES WERE SOLD WITHOUT THE REQUISITE LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY MODIFICATION LABELS.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A DRIVER MAY OVERLOAD A VEHICLE WHICH MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL MAIL TO CONSUMERS THE CORRECTED LABEL OR THE CUSTOMER WILL HAVE THE OPTION FOR DEALERS TO INSTALL THE LABEL FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON MAY 27, 2010. OWNERS MAY CONTACT SOUTHEAST TOYOTA AT 1-800-301-6859.
Dec 15, 2004
ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH A FRONT PASSENGER POWER SEAT, WHEN INSTALLING CERTAIN REAR-FACING INFANT CHILD SEAT BASES ONTO THE SEAT WITH AN EXCESSIVELY HIGH SEATBELT TENSION, IT MAY BE POSSIBLE TO UNSEAT A COMPONENT CALLED THE BUCKLE STATUS SWITCH FROM THE SEAT BELT BUCKLE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: IF THE SWITCH BECOMES UNSEATED, THE FRONT PASSENGER OCCUPANT CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAY MISTAKE THE REAR-FACING CHILD RESTRAINT FOR AN UNBELTED ADULT OCCUPANT, AND MAY NOT SUPPRESS THE DEPLOYMENT OF THE FRONT PASSENGER AIRBAG.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE FRONT PASSENGER SEATBELT BUCKLE STATUS SWITCH. THIS SAFETY IMPROVEMENT CAMPAIGN (SSC 40M) BEGAN ON DECEMBER 20, 2004. OWNERS SHOULD CONTACT TOYOTA AT 1-800-331-4331 OR LEXUS AT 1-800-255-3987..
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
2DP06003 · Engine Surging
Opened Sep 14, 2006 · Closed Apr 3, 2007
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control; Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Vehicle Speed Control:accelerator Pedal
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
Vehicle Speed Control
THE PETITIONER OWNS A MY 2006 TOYOTA CAMRY WITH A 4-CYLINDER ENGINE THAT WAS PURCHASED NEW IN JANUARY 2006. THE PETITIONER ALSO PREVIOUSLY OWNED A MY 2005 CAMRY. HE ALLEGES THAT BOTH VEHICLES EXHIBITED VEHICLE ENGINE SURGING, WHICH HE DESCRIBED AS A SHORT DURATION (1 TO 2 SECOND) INCREASE IN ENGINE SPEED OCCURRING WHILE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL IS NOT DEPRESSED. IN AN INITIAL INTERVIEW, THE PETITIONER ESTIMATED THAT 6 TO 8 SURGE INCIDENTS, OF VARYING SEVERITY, OCCURRED IN THE MY 2006 VEHICLE OVER THE COURSE OF 10,000 MILES AND 7 MONTHS OF OWNERSHIP. THE PETITIONER REPORTS THAT THE BRAKE SYSTEM IS EFFECTIVE AT OVERCOMING THE SURGE. HOWEVER, HE IS CONCERNED ABOUT REPORTS FILED WITH NHTSA ALLEGING UNCONTROLLEDSURGING IN MY 2002 TO 2006 CAMRY VEHICLES BRINGING THOSE VEHICLES TO A HIGH RATE OF SPEED (IN SOME CASES, PURPORTEDLY, WITH THE BRAKES APPLIED).AFTER REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE AVAILABLE INFORMATION, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED A VEHICLE-BASED DEFECT THAT WOULD HAVE PRODUCED THE ALLEGED ENGINE SURGE IN THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE, NOR WAS IT ABLE TO WITNESS SUCH AN EVENT WHEN ROAD TESTING THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE.EVALUATION OF A SUSPECT THROTTLE ACTUATOR REMOVED FROM THE PETITIONER?S VEHICLE DID NOT REVEAL A COMPONENT PROBLEM. WARRANTY AND PARTS SALES OF THE ACTUATOR ARE UNREMARKABLE.THESE DATA DO NOT SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A WIDE-SPREAD DEFECT OR ONGOING CONCERN. THE FAULT DETECTION AND REACTION STRATEGY DESCRIBED IN TOYOTA?S TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS INDICATES THAT A LOSS OF THROTTLE CONTROL DUE TO A COMPONENT OR SYSTEM FAILURE WOULD BE DETECTED WITHIN A ONE SECOND PERIODAFTER WHICH ENGINE POWER WOULD BE LIMITED. THE PETITIONER?S MY 2006 VEHICLE BRAKE SYSTEM OVERCOMES FULL ENGINE POWER AT EASILY ACHIEVABLE BRAKE PEDAL FORCES. BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.PLEASE SEE THE MARCH 9, 2007 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS.
DP05002 · Vehicle Speed Control
Opened Aug 5, 2005 · Closed Jan 5, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control
IN A LETTER DATED JULY 8, 2005, AND AFTER EXPERIENCING TWO INCIDENTS (AND ONE CRASH) WHERE HE ALLEGES HIS MODEL YEAR (MY) 2002 CAMRY ACCELERATED WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT, MR. JORDAN ZIPRIN PETITIONED THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION?S (NHTSA) OFFICE OF DEFECTS INVESTIGATION (ODI) TO COMMENCE A PROCEEDING TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF A DEFECT WITHIN THE ETC SYSTEM IN MY 2002 TO 2005 TOYOTA AND LEXUS VEHICLES, OR TO REOPEN A PRIOR INVESTIGATION PRELIMINARY EVALUATION (PE) 04-021.IN A LETTER DATED AUGUST 18, 2005, MR. ZIPRIN AMENDED HIS PETITION TO INCLUDE ALLEGATIONS OF INTERRELATED BRAKE AND ACCELERATION PROBLEMS THAT ALLEGEDLY RESULT IN INAPPROPRIATE AND UNCONTROLLABLE VEHICLE ACCELERATIONS.THE 1172 VEHICLE OWNER QUESTIONNAIRE REPORTS CITED BY THE PETITIONER INVOLVE 4 LEXUS AND 15 TOYOTA MODELS DEFINING A POPULATION OF 7 MILLION VEHICLES.THE REPORTS TYPICALLY ALLEGED A DEFECT IN THE BRAKE SYSTEM, THE THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM, OR A COMBINATION OF BOTH SYSTEMS.IN ITS REVIEW OF THE REPORTS, ODI A) FAILED TO FIND EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE EXISTENCE OF A BRAKE RELATED DEFECT IN THE CITED MODELS, AND B) DETERMINED THAT MANY CITED PRODUCTS WERE NOT EQUIPPED WITH ETC.ACCORDINGLY, ODI RESTRICTED ITS ANALYSIS TO THE 432 PETITIONER REPORTS INVOLVING MY 2002 TO 2005 CAMRY, SOLARA, AND ES MODELS (ALL EQUIPPED WITH ETC) THAT ALLEGED AN ABNORMAL THROTTLE CONTROL EVENT (SEE THE JANUARY 3, 2006 FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE FOR FURTHER DETAILS).ABOUT 40% OF THE 432 REPORTS INVOLVE A DRIVEABILITY CONCERN WHERE THE OPERATOR INTENTIONALLY APPLIES THE THROTTLE PEDAL, IN EXPECTATION THAT THE VEHICLE WILL ACCELERATE, AND THEN EXPERIENCES A DELAY OR HESITATION IN VEHICLE RESPONSE.THESE REPORTS INVOLVE VEHICLE RESPONSE TO INTENTIONAL DRIVER COMMANDS WHICH ODI CONSIDERS UNRELATED TO THE ALLEGATIONS RAISED BY THE PETITIONER.THEREFORE, THE REPORTS DO NOT PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED.ABOUT 20% OF THE REPORTS INVOLVE INCIDENTS WHERE OPERATORS ALLEGE VEHICLE ACCELERATION WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT AND AN INABILITY OF THE BRAKE SYSTEM TO CONTROL THE VEHICLE WHEN APPLIED.NEITHER THE REPORTS, NOR THE INTERVIEWS CONDUCTED BY ODI, IDENTIFIED ANY VEHICLE-BASED CAUSE TO EXPLAIN THE INCIDENTS OR DISCLOSED EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT A FAILURE OF THE BRAKE OR THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM HAD OCCURRED.BECAUSE THESE REPORTS DO NOT INDICATE A DISTINCT SAFETY DEFECT FOR INVESTIGATION, THE REPORTS DO NOT PROVIDE SUPPORT FOR THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED BY THE PETITIONERTHE REMAINING REPORTS (~ 40%, SIMILAR TO THE PETITIONER?S AND THOSE OF PE04-021) TYPICALLY DESCRIBE INCIDENTS WHERE A VEHICLE IS BEING MANEUVERED AT SLOW SPEED IN A CLOSE QUARTER SITUATION AT WHICH POINT THE OPERATOR ALLEGES THAT THE VEHICLE ACCELERATES WITHOUT DRIVER INPUT AND CRASHES.IN THE AFTERMATH, OPERATORS ARE UNSURE OF WHETHER THE BRAKES WERE APPLIED OR NOT, SOMETIMES STATING THERE WAS INSUFFICIENT TIME TO USE THE BRAKE; A CRASH OCCURRED AND THE OPERATOR BELIEVES AN UNCOMMANDED ACCELERATION CAUSED IT.IN SPITE OF THE EFFORT EXPENDED DURING PE04-021 AND DURING THIS ANALYSIS, ODI HAS NOT IDENTIFIED ANY VEHICLE-BASED CAUSE TO EXPLAIN THE REPORTS, OR UNCOVERED ANY EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT A THROTTLE CONTROL SYSTEM FAILURE OCCURRED.THEREFORE, THE REPORTS HAVE AMBIGUOUS SIGNIFICANCE AND DO NOT CONSTITUTE A BASIS ON WHICH ANY FURTHER INVESTIGATIVE ACTION IS WARRANTED.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS CONDUCTED, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT THE NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.CONSEQUENTLY, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES T
Illustration